I have written a number of things about consultants and offering solutions and process <whenever you say ‘process’ say it like you have taken 6 Quaaludes … reeeeaaaaalllllyyyyyy sssslllllloooooooowww>.

Solutions always sound slow.

But here’s the deal.

Success almost always resides in ‘Solution speed’.

What I mean by that is the idea of how quickly a good solution can be developed to a challenge/problem/challenge/situation.

Some boneheads call it retail marketing or retail speed but the reality is it is just coming up the right (or a very close to being right if not the rightest) solution fast.

Let’s call it solution speed <and it is underrated and often over complicated>.

The tricky part <before I dig myself into too deep a hole> to this concept is that it cannot be a fast shitty solution. It has to be a good/great/awesome/awesomer solution done with speed.

Why did I add that?

Well.

First.

Just because someone comes up with something fast doesn’t mean it’s good. Just as with anything … you need to assess it fairly <without assessing too slowly … think in a “festina lente” way>.

Second.

In the heads of young <or less experienced> people offering good solutions with speed is challenging <if not a truly rare ability>.

Good smart young people can certainly offer solution speed. It’s just that it’s not particularly the ‘rightest’ solution with the speed because they just don’t have the background knowledge to cluster enough of the right information to offer the best solution.

Anyway.

Solution speed is an equation: The right pieces of the puzzle + puzzle assembly speed = solution speed.

Because of that equation I know I have always hired people smarter than I.

Hey.

Teams need thinkers and doers to be successful but if your team can develop an awesome solution speedier than anyone else it gives your team (who had to be relatively smart in the first place to get that type of solution) some cushion time to figure out how to “do it” <assuming you don’t have a spectacular doer on hand which is always a bonus on a team>.

So.

While smart young people can’t necessarily offer the best speedy solution … smart young people do something really well.

They assemble relevant insightful facts fast.

In fact … they can be essential to the speed side of the equation.

Oh.

Because not all facts are created equal. Playing with fact puzzle pieces that you end up throwing away because they don’t fit slows you down (that means slower solution speed just in case you missed the topic of this post). Now. As noted earlier young people mostly don’t have enough experience (yet) to do two things:

Know all the factoids necessary to find the solution, and

Assimilate the factoids to build the solution puzzle.

On those two things that’s where the senior more experienced person comes in.

And this is where the best solution speed occurs.

That more experienced person <if they are worth half a shit> already has some puzzle pieces on hand <stored in their pea-like brain> for whatever challenge being addressed. All that senior person is really doing is seeking the additional pieces necessary to finish the puzzle. The faster they receive them (and recognize them) the faster the solution can be developed.

Sure.

This puts a lot of pressure on the senior more experienced person (within a solution speed construct … in a solution slow process they aren’t pressured that much).

But that’s why they should get paid the big bucks. For time is money <on all sides of the equation>.

This senior person is usually expensive hourly but less hours is less out of pocket.

The faster the solution arrives the sooner everyone else gets started <time efficiency on that side>.

All that said.

Far too often … solution speed is underrated.

Or maybe better said it’s misunderstood.

Most business people think if the solution appears too fast something has been overlooked or under-thought.And when I say ‘most’ I would feel comfortable suggesting maybe 90% of business people.

Now.

I am sure that is true some of the time.

But I am also sure that the 80/20 <if not a 90/10> rule applies most of the time.

You spend 20% of the time gaining 80% of the awesome solution and then the remaining 80% of the time developing the 10% that may make it awesome<and the other 10% you come up with isn’t worth crap>. I mention that because the other thing a business person worth half a shit knows is that 80% awesome is a “go.”

There you go.

Ponder the idea of solution speed. And don’t slow it down if you find it.

“It’s the people who no one imagines anything of, who do the things that no one imagines.”

–

The Imitation Game

==================

“The ability to learn faster than your competitors may be the only sustainable competitive advantage.”

—-

Arie de Geus – Dutch business strategist

====

Well.

One of my business pet peeves is our unhealthy pursuit of unique. Far too often in our relentless charge toward ‘unique’ we reach a dubious destination … if not a completely false ‘original’ stance.

This heinous business tradition almost always begins when some consultant comes in and forces you to sit down and answer the infamous question “so what makes you unique?”

Oh … how I get tired of this unique or ‘how are you different?’ discussion.

If you have been there, you have seen these conversations go round and round dancing on the head of a pin.

Invariably you land on one meaningless thing <meaningless to the majority of the world if not the majority of your own employees> or you have a laundry list that the consultant writes on a board and says “okay, great day, you need to figure out which of these is most important to you.”

Note to self:

“gee. thanks. what makes you think we can resolve that 48 hours from now if we cannot now?”

I am simply arguing that it is next to impossible in today’s environment to have a ‘unique.’

Ok. A sustainable one.

If people were honest they would agree that most ‘uniques’ in today’s world are short term and not sustainable <and some people just use lots of money to make short term look big>.

In service categories sustainable “uniqueness” is … well … pretty much impossible. Unique is very subjective here.

Thinking customer first or “we care” is certainly not unique nor what makes you different. That characteristic may represent something the company cares a lot about but most companies to one degree or another feature that characteristic.

In the end that means we are often talking about small degrees of separation which makes it difficult to discern the difference <or originality> to the majority. And the amount of energy we expend trying to justify and explain that this incredibly small difference translates into a significantly larger benefit … just isn’t worth the return on that investment <because that small degree of separation is lost to a competitor responder or thru consumer confusion on internet>.

Now.

What is sustainable? Character and personality.

That is certainly distinct.

Could it end up looking close to someone else? Maybe <but I would argue 90% of the time the other guy will blink … and ultimately do something that will make people question their character>.

But … brand personality/character differentiation topic is another writing of mine.

Today is just a rant on uniqueness.

Moving on.

My go-to books when I am thinking about things are good ole Ralph Waldo Emerson & Montaigne Essays. I had to pull Montaigne off the shelf as I thought about originality & business’s unhealthy relationship with “unique.”

==================

“I have gathered a posy of other men’s flowers, and nothing but the thread that binds them is mine own.”

—-

Montaigne

===============

Of all social philosophers he seemed to delve into the difference between style & substance. His originality can actually be found in some fairly relentless honesty. A lesson in and of itself to any business seeking unique or ‘original’ claims.

——————–

We are all framed of flaps and patches, and of so shapeless and diverse a contexture, that every piece and every moment playeth his part.

——————-

“Que sais-je?”

“What do I know?” was what Montaigne consistently said … kind of a “what the hell do I really know?”

Which brings me back to uniqueness … or … let’s call it the illusion of uniqueness.

It seems like every person, and every business, is born with some innate insane focus on what I would consider a fairly nebulous concept of ‘original.’

I speak with a lot of business owners.

And I can often discern the best of the best of them just by listening and waiting to see if they use this one word <or the words surrounding this one word>:

Unique.

And when they do … well … I get a shiver down my back.

Ok.

I assume there actually has to be some unique products out there in this wide world of ours because over 500,000 patents are filed every year in the good ole USofA. Of course having this conversation with a patent owner is excruciatingly painful … they keep saying “I have a patent therefore it is unique” and you keep saying “yes, sure, and the unique benefit to the buyer is ???” you often find that this conversation is a deadly doom loop with no conclusion but frustration.

I imagine the real point is that everyone wants to be the best at whatever it is they elect to do the best.

Everyone would like to be the only ones who do what you do <assuming what you do is actually of some value to people>.

Everyone wants their business to be ‘unique’ in some form or fashion.

And, if you try hard enough, I imagine every business can be ‘unique’ at something.

But I also imagine if you try hard enough you can learn to dance on the head of a pin.

==============

“There lurks, perhaps, in every human heart a desire of distinction, which inclines every man first to hope, and then to believe, that Nature has given him something peculiar to himself.”

–

Samuel Johnson

=============

Regardless, the point of me writing this <other than ‘unique’ aggravates me> is that I believe somewhere along the way something got lost.

What do I mean?

Well.

Since the beginning of time <in marketingese> the concept of unique has been important but I believe it was Ted Bates who simplified <dumbed it down> for the rest of the world to grasp in a usable form by developing what he, and his advertising agency, called the USP <the unique selling proposition>.

Excellent idea.

Dumbed it down for anyone and everyone to use.

Unfortunately it has all gone wrong since then.

The concept was “unique proposition” not “unique” <all by itself>.

Their point was … well … just that simple … proposing to people some kind of proposition that was meaningful and seemingly unique <at minimum creating a perception of uniqueness>.

Ah.

Please note the nuance.

You need not actually be unique in actuality but rather you simply needed to be able to tell people you were unique in some form or fashion.

The concept implied how you told your proposition was as important as the product-service proposition itself. The brilliance in the concept is that it recognizes most products and services are not truly unique but that didn’t mean you could explain your product-service in a way that wasn’t unique <from a selling perspective>.

And here is where it all went awry … in our world of:

a lack of desire to use someone else’s idea, even if it is a great idea, and

the belief, the theory, we should be simplifying even the simplified <or even the most dumbed down> whereby we lose the nuance.

Ultimately … this translated into the ‘experts’ starting to focus solely on the ‘unique.’

I envision the conversation went something along these lines … “okay, let me simplify this because it is pretty simply … what makes you unique? Answer that and we can get started.”

Well.

Here is the deal.

A unique selling proposition is rarely a simple process or outcome. And discerning what is truly meaningfully unique is rarely simple.

The point?

There is a big difference between “what is your unique selling proposition?” and “what makes you unique?” Both can be valuable discussions … but they are not the same discussions.

I believe the problem is that somewhere along the way marketing, advertising, brand people forgot the nuanced selling proposition concept and simply focused on some <mostly> unattainable facet – unique.

And therein lies the bigger problem.

Identifying the false unique.

Because it is our inherent nature <at least in the business world> to find what you seek.

If I am told I must find something unique than, dammit, I am sure gonna find something unique … even if I have to quasi make it up.

However, fooling yourself does not mean fooling others <although it is a common trap> in fact consumers/buyers are rarely fooled … and if they are … just once.

Look.

I fully understand everyone wants to be the best at something <which is their uniqueness>.

I fully understand that there are truly some widgets with some meaningful describable benefits that are unique.

I fully understand that what most people are construing as ‘unique’ these days is meaningless drivel. At its worst it is simply mental masturbation.

And I fully understand that there are also a lot of missed opportunities for good meaningful “unique selling propositions’ floating out there in the business universe simply because many people just don’t have it on their radar as a meaningful objective.

And, yes, positioning <using words to create a perception of uniqueness> is valuable and an opportunity. And, no, this is not ‘lying’ to the public to create sales.

In fact … I would argue it is smart and a reflection of your only true competitive advantage … the ability to learn faster than your competition.

Why? Uniqueness is NEVER alone. Standing beside it … hugging it closely is someone called “Benefit.”

They are inextricably attached as companions for life. And as you learn more about what the buyer of your product really wants <that Benefit the person> your ‘uniqueness’ may actually change … radically or nominally … it doesn’t matter. It may change to meet the needs & wants of the buyer.

Let me close with this thought:

being the best, or the only one to do something, is irrelevant if it has no value or benefit to others

unique is rare and often fleeting

However, adaptable ‘best’ and adaptable ‘uniqueness’ is neither fleeting nor useless. And the key to those is to be to be the only fastest learner in your category.

Heck. If you do that you may actually not only have a unique selling proposition but a unique product/service to offer. It will certainly maintain some distinctness <if not relevance in the marketplace>.

Regardless.

Whenever unique or original comes up I try and convince every business to stop talking about that and, if they were smart, they would be mart about focusing on themselves … who they were and who they wanted to be.

Tough to do because it doesn’t exactly match up with the standard “this is how you are supposed to do it” management guides.

Anyway.

Maybe this is the most important point.

There are a lot, a shitload, of crazy smart business people out there.

But there are not a lot of crazy smart business people willing to do something crazy like ignore the business books “plan to success” blueprints.

Here is where I put my money.

The few.

Those crazy enough to not invest energy in ‘unique seeking’ or ‘false originality’ but rather let distinction and originality simply evolve from who they are, what they think and their vision of what they think they should be.

Crazy?

Probably.

But in a world where the majority of businesses, and new ideas, fail … maybe this isn’t a crazy a thought as it sounds.

“I am not afraid of my truth anymore and I will not omit pieces of me to make you comfortable.”

—

Alex Elle

===

So.

Being yourself is a tricky topic.

I know <I know>.

Seems like “being yourself” should be simple. Like … ‘breathing’ type simple.

But it’s not.

It’s not because there is a constant struggle between an internal part <’who am I’ type shit> and external <figuring out how ‘who am I’ should actually act in public>.

For example … one of my favorite young writers, Jamie, describes herself this way:

================

I’m a writer, pretty much by process of elimination. I am also a professional aspirationalist.

That’s not a word, but I’ve made it into one, since there was nothing that could quite describe me because I didn’t want to say I’m a “professional dreamer” because that sounds like some hippie shit.

I have aspirations, like, lots of them. If you’d like me to create a TV show, get in touch with me. How about publishing my memoir? Get in touch. If you are from The Ellen Show, I will, of course, accept your interview and would be delighted to dance it out with my girl, so long as she doesn’t prank me by making me eat cilantro. In fact, I want no cilantro in anything.

It’s fucking awesome. It captures the essence of restlessness & hope & striving & unlearning & … well … all the things I believe are good and healthy with a person seeking to be better tomorrow than they are today.

What I truly love about it is that she came up with a term to capture her “self.”

I love it because being yourself … and even recognizing who ‘yourself’ is … is hard. And when I say hard … think even harder than maybe becoming a Navy Seal type hard.

……….. self …….. an entanglement of nuances ………….

It is incredibly hard because the truth is that ‘my truth’, more often than not, is most likely an evolving tangled web of characteristics which, as it evolves, simply becomes more tangled <rather than untangled>.

Yourself is constantly adapting to new learning … new learning about things … and new learning, and unlearning, about oneself.

That’s why I love professional aspirationalist.

True north on Jamie’s compass is defined. And its not a destination … but rather it is a direction.

Aspirationalist is a moving target. It is restless and unmoving at exactly the same time. It is an adventurer with some pragmatism.

It’s not being on Ellen <although she would be delighted to do so> because once that happens … there will always be something else.

Being an aspirationalist means not only having dreams … but dreaming … oh … and doing.

Yeah.

Doing lots of different shit.

Uh oh.

That also means … well … more and different dreams <and aspirations>. And doing more and different shit. Dreaming and doing. Lots of different dreaming and doing.

In the end … being a professional aspirationalist means being a restless soul.

I love it because it captures my personal belief that becoming ‘better’ as a person is experiential rather than tangible <although tangible ‘doing stuff’ is certainly a component>.

I love it because it isn’t for the faint of heart.

And isn’t what truly being yourself is all about? Having some courage to even suggest ‘I will not omit things just to make you comfortable.’

Professional aspirationalist reminded me of this other quote:

==

“I am a world that cannot be explored in one day. I am not a place for cowards.”

—

Caitlyn Siehl

<from a love letter to my stretch marks>

==

Yes.

Being a professional aspirationalist means you are not a place for cowards.

Anyway.

I wish I had come up with this word. But I am not as talented a writer as Jamie.

I like it for its sense of Life’s paradox. Paradox in that it is independent and dependent at the same time.

I like it for it’s sense of Business’s paradox. Paradox in that success in business is a combination of stillness, at the right times, and movement/restlessness at all times.

I like it because at its core it doesn’t mean shunning the world and simply being a dreamer … it has rich & royal hues of reality threading its way through its fabric.

I would like to believe I am also a professional aspirationalist.

Now.

To be clear <because Jamie is correct … the word selection was thoughtful to avoid the ‘hippie shit’>.

Pragmatically … we aspirationalists do seek <some> approval and acceptance.

Accept what I just wrote <that last sentence>.

Don’t fight it <even if you are one of those who say ‘I don’t give a fuck what anyone thinks”>.

Because you do care.

Whether you like it or not … whether you think it is right or wrong … whether you think it is a good thing or bad in that it makes you ‘weak’ in some way …. just get it set in your head – in some form or fashion … we care.

Don’t worry … we all care <not just aspirationalists>.

We all care what the people around us think about us. And by ‘people’ I mean everyone from those closest to you <who would most likely accept you in any shape and form you ended up in … but you don’t want to disappoint them> to society overall <there is some value in gaining credit for who you are and what you do>.

Approval and acceptance is not the only nutrition necessary for a healthy esteem and worth.

It is simply one part of the diet.

Even we aspirationalists need a balanced ‘self diet’.

We do not seek sole value from proving ourselves to others.

And we don’t accept sole value in and of ourselves.

Being an aspirationalist is … well … the paradox. Independent dreamer with some dependence on external cues as to the value of our aspirations.

We want to fit into the world on our own terms.

Regardless.

What a description:

Professional aspirationalist: I am not afraid of my truth anymore and I will not omit pieces of me to make you comfortable. I am a world that cannot be explored in one day. I am not a place for cowards.

If genius is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration then as a culture we tend to lionize the one percent. We love its flash and dazzle. But great power lies in the other 99 percent.

——–

“It’s not that I’m so smart. It’s that I stay with problems longer.”

—–

Albert Einstein

================

So.

I almost called this “hail to the grinders.” In a flash & dazzle world we have a nasty tendency to overlook the grinders. The ones who never even glance around for the exit because, to them, there is no exit because they know the grind will preclude the need for any exit.

The ones who grind out success, wins and … well … a lot of good shit that matters.

I will admit. It can be tough to sift through everything to see who & what matters.

The perspiration.

The grind.

The fluff.

The flash.

Yes.

We often overlook the perspiration aspect but … c’mon … to be fair … who doesn’t?

Who hasn’t?

And when haven’t we?

We love the fluff <and get bored with folding> and get blinded by the flash <but love the bright lights & colors>.

Perspiration is, in my words, grinding. It is the true grind. Manually taking that ugly stone you dug out of the dirt and manually grinding out the necessary and uncovering the diamond.

No one truly likes to grind <even if we give it some lip service> but the true keepers, the best employees, in any organization are the grinders. The ones who are willing to grind it out … day in and day out.

Now.

Not all ‘grinders’ are equal.

Huh?

Well.

Einstein may have been a grinder but his grinding was all about a vision toward an outcome. He always had the diamond vision.

Yes.

He certainly had a genius about him. I would argue his true genius was an ability to grind his way through the components, and the grind of continuous trial & error, and <here is his genius> his ability to filter out the ordinariness of that which he grinded and reconfigured the ordinary <or known> into something extraordinary. A thought. An idea. A new way of viewing that which was.

On the other hand … some grinders are just that … grinders. The ones who put in the perspiration 100% of the time.

It is just not in their DNA to have the genius inspiration. They earn it the hard way <but they earn it nonetheless>.

Here is the real point.

It all has value. Therefore … they all have value.

And they all <grinders> are organizational ‘keepers’ <because, trust me, the non grinders are wasted slots>.

The true genius perspire.

The non genius perspire.

The lazy are rarely, okay, let’s be honest … the lazy are never genius.

Yup.

The lazy, in their languid intellectualism, may seem like geniuses at some point but they are simply emperors without clothing. They get uncovered with time. Beware the false genius. And be aware of the grinders because just because they don’t have the genius doesn’t make them any less valuable.

Persistence is not glamorous but it is a fact, yes, and an unequivocal truth, that if you stay with a problem longer, grind out it out as it were, you will become smarter.

You will be a better ‘whatever you are’ because in the grind time that you are toiling, and awaiting the genius, you are also studying all aspects, connecting different dots, eliminating different dots, crafting knowledge and developing a deeper understanding.

This may seem silly but it is also true … but because persistence is not glamorous … you may need to often remind yourself that persistence is your constant companion and friend.

Embrace it or you will never even have the chance to become an Einstein.

Despite common myth, or maybe our desire to believe the genius is a born talent and “easy for some’ … or maybe we truly do get blinded by flash & dazzle … we far too often become impatient and shift our focus away from some

Contrarian investor with a group of arrow shapes and a businessman running against conventional wisdom of ivestment strategy as a strategic plan to profit by going against current market sentiment.

current grind for … well … something better <or easier>.

But.

In the end.

There is no short cut to the genius and success is found more often in the grind then in any flash & dazzle moments you may have.

The compulsion to jump from high places is called “l’appel du vide” in French.

Some call it ‘the call of the void.’

I think it’s specific to that one instance <& one action> … but I think it’s a cool phrase which creates great imagery beyond that situation.

What I mean by that is “the void” represents risk, the unknown and uncertain situations. I have read in a number of places that our growth in intelligence is situationally driven.

In other words we become smarter by assessing situations we face and contemplating alternatives.

Well.

This would presume all of us would be fucking geniuses because we think about what to do incessantly … in fact … at any given moment we are potentially viewing a lot of possible “alternate futures” in our minds.

Just to humor me … let’s call these alternatives … ‘edges.’

Why?

Well.

Frankly … it sounds more risky than ‘paths.’

Paths implies you can veer off at a leisurely pace … and retrace steps if needed and … well … even a nice bar with a cool cocktail so you can rest at some point.

But edges mean impact.

Impact as in ‘splat’ or impact as in ’that made a difference.’

Let’s face it … standing at the edge of a high place, staring into the void <or wide open spaces if you want to be poetically beautiful> … means one of those possible futures is “I step forward.”

However, since we know standing on the edge and doing so could bring highly unfavorable consequences, our internal censor whispers in our ear … “no … do not take the step … terrible things could happen.”

To be truthful.

Not many people are truly tempted to jump from the edge into a void.

Most of us just talk about it <and we like talking about it>.

But we are just talking … kind of fooling ourselves into ‘taking it into consideration‘ thinking of it the way we do all of our alternatives.

Unfortunately for us … voids are different.

Think of it this way.

For most of Life, and time, our minds are built to be flexible. We keep “jumping” from thought to thought … alternative to alternative … weighing opportunity <for happiness, success, improvement, pain, etc.>. We envision outcomes in these pondering moments.

But the void is different.

Or at least I think it is.

I don’t think it’s as straightforward as contemplation of the possible or assessing alternatives. Mainly because … well … it is difficult to assess outcomes because it is … uhm … a void.

In addition.

While there a shitload of choices and alternatives that appear before us … many with painful or grave possible consequences … these ‘this or that’ type of choices do not have a similar call of the void. They do not because they are clear choices which we can take in hand. The void is a choice inherent with risk & unknown.

The allure, and deterrent, resides in it’s contemplation of the possible with some added element of desire tinged with danger <risk> all centered around a big gaping ‘unknown’.

In our heart of hearts … we know that big risks are the things that reap big rewards.

But taking that step … oh boy .. tempting <but we hesitate>.

Ah. The temptation. The allure.

Why are we so apt to be attracted to the unknown and the unknowable? Well. In general I believe most of us are hardwired to be curious and to learn.

There is an attraction to the unknown because we inherently want to learn and to know and to try to figure out shit which we do not understand.

And to discover new things.

You can almost see the void building before your eyes.

It gets created by things left unsaid and things said. A discomfort building between what you know and don’t know.

The void truly appears when you finish questioning faith … and it becomes decision time.

You go through the decisions … and the non-decisions … and it builds up to what amounts to a personal leap … a jump into the dark … into the void.

But here is the other truth.

Once you’ve fallen into the void and through it … you find yourself in the embrace of … well … what’s next.And after doing so you will rarely fear the void again.

You actually find … or believe you will find more … in the emptiness … in that void.

This means ‘Void answerers’ … or those who can see the void as something rather than nothingness … have the ability to see things where many people see nothing.

I believe they actually see vast opportunity within emptiness.

Yes.

There is some faith.

Some faith that at some point in the void you will blindly grasp something to hold on to … either mentally or physically … and you will stop the fall into nothingness and find something.

Something that will stop the fall into the void.

Well … at least that is the desire.

Not to endlessly drop but to find some plateau on which to see new things.

The call of the void.

Look.

Not everyone hears this call. And even then … not everyone who hears it … answers it. I tend to believe the ones who answer the call would give you a 6 word answer:

—–

“I wish I could be more.”

=

Six Word Story

—–

It is easy for many of us to think of these ‘void answerers’ as crazy or irresponsible risk takers or imprudent … but we need them.

They show us that the void isn’t empty but full of ‘somethings.’

In the end … I believe we need more people who answer the call of the void.

I have relentlessly outlined Trump’s shortcomings from a business leadership standpoint.

I have relentlessly outlined Trump’s dubious relationship with the truth.

But today I turn to … well … not even his words … but how he talks.

I mean … well … who the hell talks like this?

“You know, I’m, like, a smart person.”

Uh huh.

Yeah.

Right.

I can honestly say that after having sat in thousands of business meetings, hundreds of conference rooms, dozens of boardrooms and currently trade personal emails with a wide range of business executives … the only person I have ever heard talk like this in a corporate business environment was eventually fired, monitored as he packed up his office, and escorted out of the office by security people.

He was a whack job.

And he talked like this.

All of this makes me begin to think Trump may actually … sigh … not telling us the truth when he says, “you know, I’m like a smart person.”

<note: “like” falls into the same speech pattern as the valley girl “whatever”>

The evidence continues to mount just from the shit he says that he is … well … just not smart.

I know dozens of business executives.

I know some incredibly smart people … maybe even some brilliant people.

I know some Ivy League graduates. Heck. I even know a Wharton person <Stanford people tend to be smarter & I have never met a non-smart Yale grad>.

And what I know is that none of these people talk like this.

I am no psychologist but I imagine the people who talk like this, and the ones who talk in first person <Ricky Henderson most likely being the most famous first person speaker — he called San Diego GM Kevin Towers and left the following message: “This is Rickey calling on behalf of Rickey. Rickey wants to play baseball.” > are people who are actually trying to persuade themselves that they are smart, have a good brain and know good words.

I admit when I hear Trump talk, well, I teeter between repeating Rex Tillerson’s reported thought on Trump — “fucking moron” – and simply shaking my head and saying “who the hell talks like this?”

All I know is that it seems more cartoon-like than President-like:

———————-

“I went to an Ivy League college. I was a nice student. I did very well. I’m a very intelligent person.”

‘I’m, like, a really smart person’

“I am also honored to have the greatest temperament that anybody has.”

“I would say basically we talked condolence.”

“I have one of the great memories of all time.”

“Nobody has more respect than I do. Nobody.”

“Well, I think the press makes me more uncivil than I am. You know – people don’t understand – I went to an Ivy League college. I was a nice student. I did very well. I’m a very intelligent person. You know, the fact is, I think, I really believe, I think the press creates a different image of Donald Trump than the real person.”

“… my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, okay, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart

“My generals and my military, they have decision-making ability,”

“The response and recovery effort probably has never been seen for something like this. This is an island, surrounded by water. Big water. Ocean water.”

After arriving in Israel from Saudi Arabia, Trump told his hosts: “We just got back from the Middle East.”

And, of course,

Trump to hurricane victims in Puerto Rico: “Have a good time”

===================

I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer but, c’mon, no reasonable business person with any reasonable experience talks like this.

And we know that.

We do.

For some we knew this is not normal behavior earlier and for others it has been a grudging realization.

That said.

While we know no one should talk like this we have two problems in finally admitting it & dealing with it:

Just once becomes … well … okay just one more time … and then … oops … and you are well on your way on the slippery slope.

Suffice it to say a shitload of people are on the slippery slope with regard to making excuses for Trump.

And they know it.

And while those of us not on the slope can stand there and be righteous … I think it would behoove us to recognize that any slippery slope is a sonuvabitch to get off of.

We would be foolish to utter some simplistic tripe like “just do it” … just get off it.

We would be foolish because it is difficult — for everyone <if you have ever been on a slippery slope … despair, small lies, depression, etc. … you understand>.

Give someone a hand.

Help them.

Quit moralizing. Quit being righteous. Quit being holier than thou. Just fucking help them get off the slippery slope.

Holding him accountable and our own accountability.

Oh … shit. Accountability is a two way street. No matter how heinous Trump may be on occasion if you hold him accountable … you will also be held accountable. What that means is it inevitably becomes a comparison of ‘failings.’

Well.

That sucked to type.

This means failings of character.

This means failings in judgement.

All of your own failings enter into the accountability fray <and I can guarantee he will bring them into the fray>.

If you make him accountable for his, you need to be accountable for yours <and do not be defensive in doing so>.

And this means dealing with a ‘counterpuncher’ who cannot discern the false equivalence between character failings and judgement and simply hammers away in his simplistic grade school rhetoric in a “if this, then that” pushback.

That sounds … well … horrible. But here’s what you have on your side.

Remember … who the hell talks like that?

Yeah. That’s his weak spot. Accountability does not need intellectualism so you can leave the high falutin’ words at home. Accountability of character & judgement is easy to articulate. It is easy because people really do know right from wrong and that how you win matters more than just winning … they just need to be reminded. And when they are reminded … people will hold him accountable.

Look.

No truly experienced normal business person talks like how Trump talks. They would get kicked out of any office in any viable business in America.

Trump has had 71 years, access to some of the finest America has to offer in education and the opportunity to learn more through experiences than most of us could ever dream for.

He has squandered them all.

Other than being able to bully his way through real estate transactions and make gobs of money off of licensing deals <which is simply being a grifter> he is hollow … hollow of even the most basic information a United States high school senior possesses.

If we cannot win against someone who talks like this, who is hollow … well … WTF … we don’t deserve to win.

Me? I would take him on anywhere at any time. He is hollow, I have seen hollow in business, and I know hollow cannot win.

“In general, people are not drawn to perfection in others. People are drawn to shared interests, shared problems, and an individual’s life energy. Humans connect with humans.

Hiding one’s humanity and trying to project an image of perfection makes a person vague, slippery, lifeless, and uninteresting.”

—

Robert Glover

==================

“Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.

—–

Saul D. Alinsky

===================

So.

I was fishing around for some new ways to talk about leading a business <I get bored with using the same words and thoughts over and over again> and I came across the Saul Alinsky quote … the second one I used upfront.

It resonated with me because I cannot tell you how many times I have sat in some company “forward thinking strategy” meeting discussing how we would expand the business … stretching not only beyond the existing functional strength of the business but also stepping beyond the existing expertise of the employees.

This is usually cloaked in the infamous “oh, if we can do this, we can certainly do this” statement … or the even more dangerous “we have always figured it out” mantra.

To be clear … progress is always tricky. And leading progress almost even trickier.

But, if you want it to be less trickier, ‘feeling secure’ is almost always a great step toward increasing the odds of success.

Now.

You can secure the … well … security … in a number of ways – some reality based and some emotionally charged ways.

And that is where Saul Alinsky comes back into the leadership discussion. He wrote a book calledRules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals in 1971. He wrote it as a guide to community organization <uniting “Have-Nots”, in order for them to gain social, political, legal, and economic power>.

What I loved about the Rules, beyond the rules themselves, was that Alinsky believed, when organized and directed well, the community can determine & achieve its purpose & goal. That thought, to me, is exactly the attitude a leader attempts to create <supporting a vision offered by the leader> within an organization.

What I loved about the Rules is the rules themselves are actually signposts for how to have a company compete in the marketplace.

That said.

Let me share the rules and some brief thoughts with the rules. The Rules:

—

“Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood.

Far too often … despite the fact 99% of businesses unequivocally state “our difference is our people” … a business forgets to actually build their power off of flesh & blood.

Money comes and goes.

Machines and infrastructure does what it does.

But people, flesh & blood, is the true power. It pays, as a leader, to never forget that.

“Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.

Every business I have been involved with has had an expertise. Uhm. The difficulty is that far too many leaders & managers wish the organization had a different expertise or they aspire to some other expertise.

I, personally, love the thought of isolating a company expertise, consolidating the inside expertise and using it like a battering ram in terms of progress.

People love doing things well and being appreciated for the expertise they have <and not diminished by suggesting they should have another expertise>.

“Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty.

When I saw this one I almost chuckled. It is so good, so solidly strategically right … and I would guess 95% of businesses never think this way. Oh. They may be happy identifying a “this is what we are better at than they are” and competing with that in their hip pocket … but I struggle to think of any business I have ever been involved with who has sat down and said “let’s go outside their expertise <and consciously accepting they have an expertise.”

Crushing a competitor is always fun but ignoring an opportunity to outflank them is stupid.

“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.

Ok.

Here is why I loved this one.

I loved it because bullshit & hollow rhetoric and promises/claims are strewn throughout the business world. I can guarantee, with 95% certainty, I could pick up any business’s vision & strategy & ‘rules of the road’ binder and find a significant amount of hollow shit. What would happen if I consciously attacked one of my competitor’s hollow shit? Make them live up to their own book of rules?

I am chuckling.

You would crush them.

You would crush them in two ways:

External perceptions: everyone knows almost all businesses make hollow promises but get aggravated when it becomes too obvious that the promise really is hollow

Internal perceptions: almost every employee simply accepts that some of the company rhetoric is bullshit but they accept it because it doesn’t really affect them. But if the hollow rhetoric becomes obvious AND a pain in the ass … discontent grows. Bitching at the water cooler increases.

This is an awesome leadership thought.

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

I admit. Ridiculing your competition is fraught with peril. However … having some swagger and vocalizing your swagger is … well … infuriating to some competition. It puts pressure on them.

Ridiculing, specifically, what a competitor believes is their most potent weapon will … well … infuriate them.

Pick your path wisely … but there is absolutely nothing wrong with swagger, infuriating your competition and putting some pressure on them.

“A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones.

Far too often some strategic guru envisions some tactic that will be smashingly successful and then attempt to imbue some excitement within the people who will actually do it. I think the best strategic thinkers find tactics that people enjoy AND can be smashingly successful. Unfortunately this is harder than you would think. But nothing really good is easy.

“A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news.

Amen.

A lesson we forget every day <and should not>.

“Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new.

Tactical adaptation is possibly one of the most underrated strategic decisions a business can make. While we talk a good game on this in today’s ‘digital world’ the truth is that most of us chase numbers more than we think about outflanking and expertise advantages. That is kind of the bane of the ‘big data’ world.

Numbers are good in judging things but, in the end, people & behavior are not numbers and no matter how good a tactic may appear in a number it can always be replaced.

“The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist.

I am not an empty threat guy, however, ‘power is what the competition thinks you have.’ My point here is not to make shit up and offer empty threats but rather the more you can make a competitor think, and worry, about the wrongs things the better off you are.

Stoke their imagination.

Make them have high falutin’ meetings pondering “what if” scenarios.

I wouldn’t do this to replace any of the other rules … but in combination?

Whew. This is good stuff.

“The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.” It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.

Sometimes in today’s business world we treat tactics like spaghetti we throw against the wall and hope something sticks. I am not suggesting a business should invest gobs of energy developing operations to maintain constant pressure in INDIVIDUAL tactics but I am suggesting that strategic tactics tend to coalesce and operations can be developed to support them.

I imagine the real point here is hollow tactics may generate some numbers for you but they don’t really make any dent into the competition <which, inevitably, is the key to leading an industry>.

“If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.

I love this thought because, let’s be honest, we have become a mamby pamby business world. What I mean by that is at the first glimpse of any significant negativity we tend to retreat or retrench. Pushing through a negative is not standard operating procedure in a business today.

Let me be clear on this one.

If you do Rule #5 well, you will infuriate your competition. An infuriated competitor reacts <usually with some desire to inflict some negative pain> — they will violently react. If you stay the course, maintain your expertise, well … you can push through and own a positive.

More businesses need to remember this.

“The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem.

I call this “consolidating a win.”

I cannot tell you how many times <but far too many> I have seen a business “lose after winning.” It is maddening, depressing & demoralizing … and completely avoidable.

Far too many businesses chase the success assuming they will be able to take a breath and take advantage of the success in a relatively timely fashion.

This is where ideas die.

In the take-a-breath moment.

This happens for a bunch of well-intended reasons … the most likely one is everyone invests their energy on the attack and a successful attack rather than diverting any energy & time to “what do we do when we are successful” other than maybe a framework of ‘what will happen.’

Unfortunately … frameworks do not consolidate.

The solution to this is so obvious I scratch my head as to why more businesses do not do it. Businesses always have two basic levels … the outside structure and the inside structure. The outside is the face of the organization and most typically is the one that pushes through and creates the ‘wins.’ The inside operations gets shit done … I have always had an ‘inside operations team’ well briefed and ready to go and insert them into the breach as soon as the win has occurred and have the ‘fresh team’ consolidate.

I could write an entire ‘consolidation strategy’ piece but suffice it to say your business gains value in a number of dimensions by doing it this way.

The larger point with this Rule is ‘don’t lose a win by not having a plan for when you win.’

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

Well. Let me share the thought that first hit me on this … “a brand is a promise delivered in the store everyday” <this was The Limited’s phrase>. The point is that a business doesn’t exist if it doesn’t deliver upon what it promises.

That said … this is an important rule. As in a REALLY important rule that I bet 99% of companies do not even think about let alone adhere to. Most businesses target another competitor’s users & customers and go about trying to steal them <persuade them to switch>.

Well.

What about instead we attacked the company, the support network … the “promise” as it were … and make the people who actually deliver the promise start doubting, or start feeling less than secure, or just “less good about their brand & promise”?

If we did this, we create a gap, isolate as it were, between what the customer thought they wanted and what they perceive they are getting or would get.

I love this rule.

I admit I had never thought about t this way before … but from here on out it is part of my leadership toolkit.

———

Okay.

Those are some good rules for business.

But you know what?

It all comes back to the first Rule and my first quote.

Flesh & blood is the real power in any business and … people are drawn to shared interests, shared problems, and an individual’s life energy. Humans connect with humans.

Honestly … I don’t think most leaders ignore the fact the people in their organizations are important but I think we don’t elevate them to ‘flesh & blood is the power’ status.

And that is where the Rules come in.

Inherent to each rule, and the success therein, resides with … well … the flesh & blood. That is a pragmatic reminder for leading a business.

“As a therapist, let me just say: almost every trauma survivor I’ve ever had has at some point said, ‘But I didn’t have it as bad as some people,’ and then talked about how other types of trauma are worse. Even my most-traumatized, most-abused, most psychologically-injured clients say this.

The ones who were cheated on, abandoned, and neglected say this.

The ones who were in dangerous accidents/disasters say this.

The ones who were horrifyingly sexually abused say this.

The ones who were brutally beaten say this.

The ones who were psychologically tortured for decades say this.

What does that tell you?

That one of the typical side-effects of trauma is to make you believe that you are unworthy of care. Don’t buy into it, because it’s nonsense. It doesn’t matter if someone else had it ‘worse.’

Every person who experiences a trauma deserves to get the attention and care they need to heal from it.”

—

hobbitsaarebas

===================

“It’s true, I suffer a great deal–but do I suffer well? That is the question.”

―

Thérèse de Lisieux

===

“… victimization is a way of attracting sympathy, so rather than emphasize either their strength or inner worth, the aggrieved emphasize their oppression and social marginalization.”

—-

sociologists Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning

============

Whew.

Believing you are unworthy of care.

I call this “victimhood backlash.”

Now.

This is different than feeling unworthy of love, respect or … well … unworthy of something or any of that type of thing.

In fact.

This is actually the exact opposite of a victim mentality.

This is when something truly bad has happened to you <you are a real victim of something> and you look around and say “whew, they are the real victims.” In a real sense this person then constructs an extremely viable narrative to suggest that while they are in a shithole … their shithole is nothing compared to some other people’s shithole.

This is not self deprecation … it is a sincere feeling that what you did or experienced was closer to ordinary rather than extraordinary.

But.

I say this unequivocally … even if someone is shrugging off help or maybe even adamantly opposing the help … a hole is a hole and you need help getting out of holes.

Someone may not think they are worthy of care, or asking for help … but they need it.

Anyway.

I have two thoughts on this ‘believing unworthy of care’.

First.

A hole is a hole.

If you are in a hole, it is a hole.

I have written this before … a shithole is a shithole. We are not in the shithole comparison business. All shitholes are dark, deep and often don’t have a visible ladder to get out of the shithole.

To me?

Horrible is horrible.

A black hole is a black hole.

And while maybe not all holes and abysses are created equal … all seem equally deep, dark & shitty when in one.

This may not be literally true … but figuratively I tend to believe that is how we view it when encountering some shit Life gives us which places us into some dark hole.

Second.

I do not believe that victimhood is some cultural crisis <the sociologists I highlight upfront do suggest that>.

Yeah.

The things for which we can publicly accept the fact we were a victim of has certainly increased. This doesn’t mean more shit, and shitholes, have occurred … it is just that it is now more acceptable to admit them and address them.

Can this get out of whack? Sure.

But a long as someone isn’t creating a shithole and claiming being a victim then .. well … a shithoe is a shithole.

I would suggest that we want people who feel like they are n some shithole because they were a victim of something to speak out regardless of whether an everyday schmuck like me may look at them and say “c’mon, be real, that’s Life” and maybe we should be focusing on how to better address them when they speak out.

We need less pandering and more reality management. We need less judgement and more dialogue.

We need to grow a dialogue culture. Rather than responding to comments or behaviors with less condemnation or judgement and more engagement to engage rather than repel <without increasing victim mentality but rather managing it>.

But we do not want anyone at anytime to believe that they are unworthy of care.

Anyway.

I can almost guarantee almost everyone will either slip into a hole or go crashing into a hole at some point in their Life.

And that person <which means, uhm, everyone> will need help getting out of it.

For if you permit someone to linger too long in the hole … well … the abyss will gaze into them. And inevitably find some dark corner in the mind that they will find a place to live, eat and breathe for years and years to come.

Just accept what I just said without shrugging or thinking “that’s some bad shit.”

<Most> Holes are fine in Life.

They are part of Life.

Regardless of whether the shithole is incredibly shitty or just basic shit they have the same intended conclusion — you just have to make sure you know how to get out of them.

Ah.

Which leads me back to the opening quote.

Someone who believes that they are unworthy of care.

I say that because you can spend a lot of time looking around at other shitholes thinking about how to get other people out of their shitholes … all the while ignoring your own shithole, avoiding finding a way out of our own shithole and, maybe the worst, if you gaze long enough into an abyss … anyone’s abyss … it will gaze into you.

============

“And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you.”

–

<Beyond Good and Evil> Friedrich Nietzsche

==============

Look.

I have had this debate a zillion times … the one where you discuss who has it worse.

Who is going through tougher times.

Who has actually gone through a tougher time.

Maybe even discussing a bad moment in life as horrible, but always discussing ‘horrible’ relative to other horribleness.

And while it is most likely true that, regardless of your situation, someone somewhere has it worse than you do … that thought only seems to offer some false comfort nor does it really offer any solutions.

To me … comparing bad situations is not only not very helpful but it also tends to suggest the wrong thing to me – “my suffering isn’t equal to your suffering.” Which tends to lead to “I don’t believe I am worthy of care.”

Bad. Wrong.

I do not believe we should be in the shithole comparison business.

A shit hole is a shithole and anyone in a shithole is just as worth of care as anyone else in a shithole.

“I eventually came to understand that in harboring the anger, the bitterness and resentment towards those that had hurt me, I was giving the reins of control over to them.”

―

Isabel Lopez

==================

“Beware of those who are bitter, for they will never allow you to enjoy your fruit.”

―

Suzy Kassem

==============

Well.

Spite and resentment is one of the least discussed business ailments in the business leadership and organization world.

What I mean is that businesses around the world <including the good ole USofA> are strewn with middle management and upper management who carry a full backpack of resentment. This backpack has a nifty well designed logo on it — victim.

I would imagine <this is a guess> that this significant sprinkling of people in the business world carrying around the resentment of being victimized in some form or fashion do not hold the most senior spots but rather they hold the responsibilities most dangerous to the overall health of an organization – middle management.

They are most likely not at the top because those people got the positions they deserve <mostly>.

The ones who carry resentment are the ones who have been promoted “too slowly” or maybe haven’t been “recognized for the talents they offer” or maybe have been passed over by “someone who doesn’t know half the shit I know” … and then … to their satisfaction … they have FINALLY been promoted.

They take the step up but before they do … stop at the bottom of the stairs to pick up their backpack of resentment … and then accept the step up.

I often think of this as the ugly underbelly of ‘entitled’ or “finally getting what one deserves.” This is … uhm … in other words … resentment. And resentment carries a nasty quiver of grievance arrows to shoot when given the opportunity.

And grievances have a nasty habit of being one of those things that like to be addressed and not ignored.

Now.

Some people confuse this with “carrying a chip on their shoulder” which is what got them to where they are today.

Uhm. That’s bullshit.

People mistakenly conflate “carrying a chip on their shoulder” with ambition.

It’s not as simple as that. In fact … that simplistic ‘go about business like they have a chip on their shoulder’ is actually just a lazy attitude toward motivation.

It is more often than not some self-created ‘boogieman’ someone has created in their mind in order to go out and be your best. That’s bullshit. If that’s all you have for motivation … well … that’s just not good <for you and the people you work with>.

Yes.

In small doses a ‘chip on your shoulder’ can give you some well needed nudges to “I will show them” attitude at some key moments.

No.

Large doses, or constant, “conducting myself with a chip on my shoulder” attitude simply makes you … well … an asshole.

You become an asshole because this 100% chip on shoulder attitude actually makes hate, in some form or fashion, the energy to drive everything – it creates an outsized sense of grievance which you bring with you wherever you go.

This grievance not only seems to pour from every pore in this person but also seems to appear every time this person makes a decision <if not in the words they say>.

Yeah.

The resentment people can be crafty.

Crafty in that they justify their behavior not just based on their outsized chip but more often that they are standing up for all who have been overlooked and begrudged of what they were entitled to by some unfair system or ‘cadre of assholes driven to let mediocrity thrive.’

It’s another version of us versus them but with a total selfish foundation.

In addition.

If they are good at masking their resentment, each decision, taken as mutually exclusive of all other decisions, can maybe be explained as a ‘personal issue being addressed’ or sometimes even simply an impulsive instinctual decision.

That’s bullshit too.

I am not suggesting all employees burdened by an unhealthy weight of resentment are actually bad managers and business people <in a pragmatic competent sense> but they do have a nasty tendency to have built this façade of some “personal brand” which they have honed over time as they have been ignored & overlooked so much so that all decisions and choices get instinctually filtered through this personal brand filter.

Nothing is impulsive, nothing is “resentment driven” and nothing is “addressing a grievance” … it is all simply driven by the personal brand.

What makes this behavior confusing to people <in terms of trying to discern motivations and the sense that there is an unhealthy amount of resentment incorporated into the management style> is that there is no long term strategy … it just assumes that all transactions meet the brand therefore, in the long run, it is good.

Exceeding expectations is defined in a transaction by transaction basis and weapons used to meet expectations <responsibilities> are justified a means to an end. In other words these managers can screw anyone they want professionally but if within that specific project, assignment or transaction the greater organizational expectations are met or exceeded … well … this manager has “won.”

Oddly … this behavior creates an odd sense of consistency … & inconsistency. It can often appear inconsistent in that the actions, behavior & decisions are not particularly driven by any business philosophy or ideology … or even based on what is right or wrong. This drives the appearance of inconsistency.

The consistency is grounded on vindictiveness. This doesn’t mean any and all actions are vindictive just that if the opportunity arises to address some self-defined grievance and the window of opportunity to be vindictive opens … well … this person will jump through that window.

===============

“I must fight with my weapons. Not his. Not selfishness and brutality and shame and resentment.”

―

John Fowles

===================

Here is the problem with all that I have shared today.

Resentment is part of the devilish trinity of bad shit in a business environment – fear, anger, resentment.

All the yesterdays make this person angry and humiliated and, frankly, they feel like they have been taken advantage of.

It creates a negative emotional foundation from which all behavior and actions are leveraged from.

I could argue that this is a cultural thing. Something like a “culture of entitlement” in which people feel like they are promised promotions & money simply because they work hard.

I will not.

This is an individual issue.

Individuals are responsible and complicit in this attitude and behavior – culture does not force them to do anything and think anything on this issue.

I could argue that this is some version of culture encouraging a larger sense of victimhood.

I will not.

This is an individual issue.

It is not victimhood if you shoulder your own responsibilities and are ‘punished’ if the chips do not fall your way.

I could argue that thus is some warped version of culture encouraging unrealistic expectations.

I will not.

This is an individual issue.

Expectations are defined personally … society and culture doesn’t tell you what to expect … you craft that expectation all by your lonesome. And, I have news for everyone, while Life & business can be pretty cruel and unfair, in general, those who have ability and work hard do not typically get overlooked or left behind. Hate to tell the “resentful managers” but … well … I feel pretty confident suggesting that as a basic business truth.

The only thing I will argue is that someone who has a big backpack of resentment should never be a leader.

Why?

Anger today.

Resentment of yesterday.

Fear of tomorrow.

That is the trio of partners in crime in this sad story. I have to tell you. I am fairly sure no business wants those three sitting in any one office every day in their business. And I am absolutely sure these are not qualifications one seeks in a new employee.

“The worst thing about falling to pieces is that humans can do it so quietly.”

–

inkskinned tumblr

===========================

“The loneliest moment in someone’s life is when they are watching their whole world fall apart, and all they can do is stare blankly.”

——

F. Scott Fitzgerald

==============

Well.

Stark.

That is what I felt when I put these two quotes together for the first time.

Starkly absent of cynicism, pessimism or optimism.

Just stark.

Stripped of any hues of Life.

That’s what I felt.

Shit.

I then sat back and said “whew, if I felt that … imagine how someone feels who actually writes these things.”

And maybe that is my point.

Most of us can only imagine how it feels.

Most of us, at our worst, get only a glimpse of this starkness.

And even then our stark is most likely not this stark.

Now … what I do know that humans can fall to pieces incredibly quietly.

I do know that starkness is difficult to express to someone who has never seen starkness.

I do know that there are most likely more people who, on the outside, are holding their shit together so well that most of us don’t even think to offer a ‘are you doing okay’ question.

I do know these are the people who so quietly are falling apart.

So here’s the deal.

Falling apart is falling apart. What I mean by that is everything, and I mean everything, that falls apart makes some sound. You just have to listen closely enough to hear it.

===============

No, now you’ve got me interested, I want to know

exactly what seems wrong to you, how something could

seem wrong to you. In what way do things get to be wrong?

——

John Ashbery

=====================

You have to listen closely for the sound one makes when they fall to pieces quietly.

For there is a sound.

It may be just a whisper of a sound. You may even confuse it for the rustle of falling leaves.

But.

Quietly or not … as the pieces fall apart they make a sound.

You just have to listen closely.

This gets even trickier. Let me go back to my ‘stark’ opening. If you have never truly experienced stark, it is difficult to see this kind of starkness.

Sure.

You may get a sense of ‘something wrong’ but far too often we skate along the superficial surface of ‘something wrong’ assuming lack of depth or “not any starker than we have ever seen” and … well … we miss the true starkness.

My point?

What may sound like the rustle of some dead leaves on the ground may actually be the sound of some starkness we cannot even imagine.

By the way … what differentiates humans from other species isn’t opposable thumbs or the size of our brains … but rather compassion and an interest in humans – interest as in doing better, being better and jut … well … a better life <and helping people be better if they are not>.

While, of course, we want it to be better for ourselves we don’t want it to suck for others. And we certainly don’t want anyone to have such a stark existence that their Life retains no color or, worse, no hope.

The difficulty in fulfilling this inner innate characteristic is the outer irate characteristic of Life. It is always angrily demanding you to focus on it … and not the other humans occupying Life.

Look.

I am not suggesting running around listening to everyone’s whispers looking to save everyone.

I would suggest that the two quotes I used reminded me that saving a human … just one … can sometimes be enough.

Just listen closely.

Humans can fall to pieces so quietly. And no human, even someone we really do not like much, deserves to have such a stark existence that … well … they can only stare blankly at a Life falling apart.